If you’re evaluating RiakCS vs. Ceph you might want to toss LeoFS[1] in the mix and give it a run. Just as RiakCS it is a dynamo inspired system build in Erlang and comes with the same advantages and disadvantages. But unlike RiakCS it is pretty much exclusive a Object Store so can take a few different optimizations for this kind of work that might not be possible in a general purpose database as Riak (this is my personal guess not a research founded conclusion). The team is (much) smaller then bash (obviously) but they’re a very nice and responsive bunch. I ended up using it as a s3 backend for Project-FiFo due to it’s performance characteristics. With current releases I manage to get a sigle file upload speed of ~1.2GB/s using gof3r[2] (this might be a client limitation but I haven’t had time to investigate the details).
[1] http://leo-project.net/leofs/ <http://leo-project.net/leofs/> [2] https://github.com/rlmcpherson/s3gof3r/tree/master/gof3r <https://github.com/rlmcpherson/s3gof3r/tree/master/gof3r> --- Cheers, Heinz Nikolaus Gies [email protected] > On Nov 25, 2014, at 6:08, Toby Corkindale <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > I wondered if you managed to significantly improve your Riak CS > performance, or not? > > I just ask as we've been getting not-dissimilar performance out of > Riak CS too (4-5 mbyte/sec max per client, on bare metal hardware), > for quite a long time. (I swear it was faster originally, when there > was a lot less data in the whole system.) > This is after applying all the tweaks available -- networking stack, > filesystem mount options, assorted Erlang vm.args, and increased put > concurrency/buffer options. > > We put up with it because it's been just-about sufficient enough for > our needs and Riak CS has been reliable and easy to administer -- but > it's becoming more of an issue, and so I'm curious to know if other > people *do* manage to achieve *good* per-client speeds out of Riak CS > or if this is just how things always are? > And we're way off the mark, maybe we can find out why.. > > Details of our setup: > 6 node cluster. RIng size of 64. > Riak 1.4.10 > Riak CS 1.5.2 > (installed from official Basho repos) > > Tests conducted using both multi-part and non-multi-part upload mode; > performance is similar with both. Tested against cluster when very > lightly loaded. > For the sake of testing, a 100M file is being used, that contains > random (hard to compress) data. > > Cheers, > Toby > > On 8 November 2014 at 01:41, David Meekin <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Hi, >> I’ve setup a test 4 node RiakCS cluster on HP BL460c hardware and I can’t >> seem to get S3 upload speeds above 2MB/s >> I’m connecting direct to RiackCS on one of the nodes so there is no load >> balancing software in place. >> I have also installed s3cmd locally onto one of the nodes and the speeds >> locally are the same. >> These 4 nodes also run a test CEPH cluster with RadosGW and s3 uploads to >> CEPH achieve 125MB/s >> Any help would be appreciated as I’m currently evaluating both CEPH and >> RiakCS. > > _______________________________________________ > riak-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
_______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
